Analytical comparison between two hematological analyzer systems: CAL‐8000 vs. XN‐9000

Abstract

Differences exist between the two analyzers, especially in the generation of morphology flags, thus emphasizing the need of pursuing a major degree of harmonization and/or adopting instrument-specific reference ranges.

Evaluation and comparison of automated hematology analyzer, flow cytometry, and digital morphology analyzer for monocyte counting

“…Irrespective of the technique used for CBC, the neutrophil, lymphocyte, and eosinophil counts obtained with various flow cytometers are substantially aligned, and are also well correlated with the reference technique (ie, optical microscopy: OM). Conversely, many problems still plague both the monocyte and basophil counts, and this is mainly attributable to poor agreement among different instrumentation and insufficient comparability with OM.…”

“…Despite the development of these techniques has allowed to garner many advancements, the monocyte count remains a critical test. The analytical performance of different flow cytometry and digital cell morphology systems needs hence to be thoughtfully assessed and compared with the current reference method (ie, OM), but should also be compared among them for a better understanding of data generated with automated cells counting and their potential clinical applications.…”

Comparing the performance of three panels rules of blood smear review criteria on an Italian multicenter evaluation

“…These new CBC parameters have led to an improvement in analytical efficiency, but their interpretation requires specialized knowledge from the pathologist, who is often crucial in understanding the clinician's needs and counseling the best analytical procedure or application in order to optimize the diagnostic process . Similarly, the morphological flags generated by HAs are useful to highlight the presence of abnormalities in cell morphology and/or other sample alterations.…”

“…Similarly, the morphological flags generated by HAs are useful to highlight the presence of abnormalities in cell morphology and/or other sample alterations. However, their sensitivity (SE) and specificity (SP) are strictly dependent on the HAs …”

An Evaluation of Sysmex XS-1000i Five Part versus Orphee Mythic Three Part Differential Cell Counter in Hematological Disorders

“…(12) Buoro S et al compared analytical performance between two hematological analyzers according to them difference exist between the two analyzers, especially in the generation of morphology flags. (13) RDW-SD is more sensitive indicator of anisocytosis, not affected by MCV is given only by Sysmex 5part counter. Blast flagging as one of the clinically most relevant warning message, a significant improvement of sensitivity was found only for sysmex 5part.P-LCR which help in diagnosis of thrombocytopenia, is additional parameter given by Sysmex 5part.…”